Gay marriage - 'shameful'?

[harvey19 541]

As ridiculous are arguing that gays shouldn't marry because you're not comparing like with like, it heterosexuals marrying.

A man and woman is different to a man and man.

You cannot change this no matter how long you go round in circles.

I have posted a compromise situattion as I am trying to be positive and base my arguments on fact.

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

A man and woman is different to a man and man.

No they aren't. I don't accept any of your premises anymore.

[PaliRichard 10]

Janie

 

We are all different, we all have our flaws and we all have our plus points, they go across many different shades and subtleties.

 

Some people like to slink away when they have been shown to be wrong, some will step back and say 'I hold my hands up' (I've experienced both on this thread alone) some will defend their position to the bitter end. But we are on a public forum and that is what you would expect.

 

Some of the posters on here who are happy to challenge your view on this issue slink away on other issues, some are consistant - that is the beauty of the forum, watching the characters come alive.

 

I think some of the posters are making more of an issue because you are Christian, some are not, don't fall into the trap of thinking that they are all the same, person A and person B will probably share the same view on this but be at each others throats on a different issue.

 

Is gay marriage shameful? That's the title of the thread. It's gone through the shades of is it shameful to is it acceptable in all circumstances? I think it's a wonderful thing that this issue is being debated. I'm very 'conservative' in most respects but I agree with those who have been dubbed 'liberals' on here. That's the beauty of the forum, try not to let it get to you.

 

[harvey19 541]

I'm happy with that. Two men marrying can be called a ... *thinks* ... a marriage.

 

 

But then 2 women would be called a Warriage, clearly discrimination.

[janie48 95]

Considering you're wrong on the issue of discrimination/equality, the above doesn't come as a surprise.

 

So i was right then you admit it.

Much have i learned on this thread.

After sharing my home life,working life and friendships with atheists l have now come accross a different kind,and not the kind i want to keep company with.

[Suffragette1 10]

A man and woman is different to a man and man.

You cannot change this no matter how long you go round in circles.

I have posted a compromise situattion as I am trying to be positive and base my arguments on fact.

 

Different only in terms of the sex of one of the parties. Men and women are different, should they not have the same rights? This is exactly the same. Why should same sex couples (and I include lesbians in that as you seem to be focusing predominantly on gay men) not be allowed the same rights and status as a heterosexual couple? Apart from reiterating your mantra ad nauseam 'because they are different and can have a civil partnership', what valid, rational and fair reason is there to discriminate against them?

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

But then 2 women would be called a Warriage, clearly discrimination.

Hence why a same-sex marriage shouldn't be called a sarriage.

[PaliRichard 10]

I'm happy with that. Two men marrying can be called a ... *thinks* ... a marriage.

 

Lovely.

 

PS. I thought your argument was based on gender, not sexuality. Unless a garriage is for happy people.

 

I've got a garriage, it keeps my car insurance down a treat

 

'Get's coat'

[sharrowman 10]

My local mosque recently married two lesbians.

[barleycorn 10]

My local mosque recently married two lesbians.

 

I thought polygamy was illegal?

 

jb

[harvey19 541]

Different only in terms of the sex of one of the parties. Men and women are different, should they not have the same rights? This is exactly the same. Why should same sex couples (and I include lesbians in that as you seem to be focusing predominantly on gay men) not be allowed the same rights and status as a heterosexual couple? Apart from reiterating your mantra ad nauseam 'because they are different and can have a civil partnership', what valid, rational and fair reason is there to discriminate against them?

 

I have given very clear explanations many times.

[Stomp 10]

You have been arguing for homosexuals to have the same named union as hetrosexuals.

No matter how the argument is presented this is what it boils down to,

They have something we don't qualify for and so will pretend a man and woman are the same.

You can go round in circles all day but it does not change the fact that marriage is an established union between man and woman.

 

I believe this is the crux of your argument?

 

In which case I would say that yes same sex couples have something that opposite sex couples don't have. This is in my opinion discriminating against hetrosexual couples, and so the law should be changed to allow same sex couples to marry, and then abolish civil partnerships.